2L the ODONATA FAUNA of BEAR MEADOWS, a BOREAL BOG in CENTRAL PENNSYLVANIA

Total Page:16

File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb

2L the ODONATA FAUNA of BEAR MEADOWS, a BOREAL BOG in CENTRAL PENNSYLVANIA li .2l Reprinted from the Proceedings of the Pa. Academy of Science, Vol. 42, 1968 THE ODONATA FAUNA OF BEAR MEADOWS, A BOREAL BOG IN CENTRAL PENNSYLVANIA H. B. WHITE, III Graduate Department of Biochemistry Brandeis University Waltham, Massachusetts 02154 G. H. AND A. F. BEATTY P. 0. Box 281 State College, Pennsylvania 16801 ABSTRACT In this report are compiled all known Odon­ Fifty-eight species of Odonata are re­ ata records for Bear Meadows through 1966. Since collecting has covered all months from corded as occurring at Bear Meadows, a May to November, the seasonal distribution of sphagnum bog in Central Pennsylvania many of the 58 species known from Bear Mea­ Seasonal distribution, relative abundance dows can be estimated. The data presented in and habitat preference are discussed. this paper are primarily the authors'; however, included are previously unpublished contribu­ tions of a number of collectors: J. Chemsak, INTRODUCTION C. Cook, T. W. Donnelly, S. W. Frost, J. Gil­ Bear Meadows is a 520-acre sphagnum bog lespie, J. G. Needham, R. A. Raff, J. M. Run­ nestled in the mountains of central Pennsyl­ ner and J. Schmidt. vania (Figs. 1, 2). It is 56 miles southwest of the nearest terminal moraine of Wisconsin LOCATION AND DESCRIPTION glaciation (1), the location of which makes it OF BEAR MEADOWS a very interesting place to study boreal organ­ Bear Meadows lies abov.t 7 miles south of isms at or near their southern limit of distribu­ State College in a protected mountain valley tion (2). Botanists are quite familiar with this 1824 ft above sea level. A semicircular moun­ bog because boreal species, such· as balsam fir tain ridge 500 ft above the valley surrounds and black spruce, grow here in association with the bog except for two openings to the north­ a flora more typical of Pennsylvania (3,4,5,6). east (Fig. 2). Access is by unpaved roads from Study of the dragonflies of Bear Meadows has U.S. Routes 322 and 545. revealed a pattern of association similar to that Palynological studies indicate that Bear found with plants. Meadows was formed 10,000 years ago when In the summer of 1931, James G. Needham drainage from the area was blocked, creating a of Cornell University, one of the preeminent shallow lake (6,7). The normal progression of workers on dragonflies, was a visiting professor bog formation has proceeded to the point where at the Penn State Nature Camp, located at forest has invaded much of the bog's original what is now Alan Seeger State Forest Monu­ area leaving at present a one and one quarter ment in Huntingdon County. He went with mile open strip along peat-stained Sinking a party of students and faculty to visit Bear Creek. On either side of this meandering Meadows, then difficult of access, because it stream, thick mats of sphagnum and peat sup­ was said to be an interesting place although port marsh grasses, sedges, leatherleaf and ex­ little-studied biologically. He caught speci­ tensive stands of high bush blueberries. The mens of Leucorrhinia hudsonica and Somato­ invading forest consists primarily of black chlora elongata, observed the unco=on tree spruce, hemlock, balsam fir, red maple, black Prunus alleghaniensis, and came back to camp gum and a dense undergrowth of rhododen­ effervescing with enthusiasm about the mar­ dron. Numerous seepage areas and springs velous boreal bog that he had seen, and declar­ along the edge of the bog feed Sinking Creek. ing that he would make a special study of its Despite logging operations in the late 19th dragonflies and write a paper on it. For some century (3) and the annual invasion of blue­ reason he never did, and this present contribu­ berry pickers, Bear Meadows has remained tion is a monument to the spirit and character generally unaltered. In 1965 Bear Meadows of James G. Needham. was proclaimed a National Forest Monument PENNSYLVANIA ACADEMY OF SCIENCE 131 Figure 1. Bear Meadow;;, view from near the bridge looking west. by Interior Secretary Udall, which should help RESULTS maintain this unusual habitat for future study The seasonal distribution, relative abundance and appreciation. and habitat affinities of the 58 species of PROCEDURE Odonata from Bear Meadows is summarized On most collecting trips to Bear Meadows it in Table 1. The fauna includes 7 species with was attempted to survey the species of Odon­ strong boreal affinities and 12 others with ata present and to estimate their relative weaker but definite boreal preferences. Ten abundance. A few sight records have been in­ species have a strong preference for streams cluded of species seen only on the wing but and are therefore associated with Sinking identified with certainty. Creek rather than the bog. Of the remaining Because of its ready access, the eastern end 29 species, 21 are frequent to common in cen­ of the bog adjacent to the bridge (Fig. 2) has tral Pennsylvania and do not show any spe­ received particular attention. This portion of cial preference for bog or stream environments. the bog contains a variety of sub-habitats and Eight species must be considered strays from is consequently populated by numerous species considerable distances. Their presence at Bear of Odonata. Surveys of the entire bog indicate Meadows is probably accidental. that collecting in the vicinity of the bridge is most productive and gives a reasonably repre­ Based on relative abundance, 29 or 50% of sentative sample of the species present. the species are rare. These are unlikely to be found during their flying season even when Data presented in this paper include those of N eedham's 1931 visit and several other early searched for. Twelve species are scarce, but collections, but over 80% of the records are the are usually collected in small numbers when result of work done since 1953. With the ex­ looked for. Ten species, observed consistently ception of data yielded by a collecting trip by without difficulty during their flying season, G. H. Beatty in June, 1945 (8) , none of the are termed common. The 7 species which are records in this paper has heretofore been re­ found in large numbers during their peak sea­ ported. son are classified as abundant. 132 PENNSYLVANIA ACADEMY OF SCIENCE <:-<,.. BEAR MEADOWS . ~o CENTRE COUNTY, PENNSYLVANtf ELEVATION 1824 FEET ~ ~BOG FOREST ~]BOG 1/4 MILE ·<t 0 DISCUSSION Somatochlora walshi Scudder Libellula quadrimaculata Linne Sphagnum bogs are among the less co=on Leucorrhinia hudsonica Selys habitat types in the Appalachians and their N ehalennia gracilis Morse Odonata faunas undoubtedly require much more study. This investigation of the Odonata In June, Gomphaeschna furcillata is an im­ of Bear Meadows has extended the known geo­ portant though not very conspicuous member graphical distribution of a number of species. of the Bear Meadows fauna. It is a cryptically It has also made the populations of other large colored species which blends with trunks of Pennsylvania bogs at Black Moshannon and dead trees on which it rests. The edge of the Tamarack, in Centre and Clinton Counties open meadow, especially where Sinking Creek respectively, more predictable since several of flows into the woods at the eastern end of the the species from Bear Meadows, which were bog, is the habitat of images of this species; unique records for the state, are now known the larvae have never been found at Bear from these other bogs. In the ensuing dis· Meadows though frequently sought. cussion, the Odonata population of Bear Mead­ Somatochlora elongata has been taken in few ows is divided into groups with similar ecologi­ Pennsylvania locations other than Bear Mead­ cal affinities. ows. This, however, is not the southernmost record since it has been reported from Mary­ The following species represent typical bog land (9), Virginia, and North Carolina (10). inhabitants and are part of the permanent Somatochlora elongata is not co=on at Bear breeding population. Meadows. Vlhen found, it is usually patrolling Gomphaeschna furcillata Say low over the stream, hovering frequently to ex­ Somatochlora elongata Scudder amine small coves along the bank, a flight Somatochlora tenebrosa Say pattern more characteristic of Aeshnids. PENNSYLVANIA ACADEMY OF SCIENCE 133 Since Bear Meadows is within the known probably part of the permanent breeding popu­ geographical range of Somatochlora tenebrosa, lation. its presence is of little distributional signifi­ Two species on this list are worthy of dis­ cance. It flies over the stream or hovers in cussion. Gomphus borealis has been collected sunlit clearings. on only 3 occasions. It is co=only and locally When Somatochlora walshi was first col­ abundant at Black Moshannon and Tamarack lected at Bear Meadows, it was the only Penn­ where it congregates on the bare ground, often sylvania occurrence and also the southern at the breast of beaver dams. Twice in this limit of its known distribution. Subsequently century beaver were introduced at Bear Mead­ it has been taken at the Black Moshannon and ows; however, they did not become established Tamarack bogs north of Bear Meadows but (3). Perhaps Gomphus borealis, along with still south of the Wisconsin Moraine. This spe­ the dead spires of drowned trees in the open cies is quite co=on some years. Occasionally meadow, is a vestige of short-lived beaver ac­ it flies over the stream, but more frequently tivity. it hovers over marshy pockets in the open Until recently (8) Epitheca canis was not meadow and sunny glades of the woodland known south of New York State. Studies in border. central Pennsylvania have shown this species The golden-flecked wings of Libellula quad­ to be relatively co=on and widespread al­ rimaculata are seen throughout June and July.
Recommended publications
  • Odonata: Coenagrionidae
    J. Acad. Entomol. Soc. 13: 49-53 (2017) NOTE First occurrence of Enallagma pictum (Scarlet Bluet) (Odonata: Coenagrionidae) in Canada and additional records of Celithemis martha (Martha’s Pennant) (Odonata: Libellulidae) in New Brunswick: possible climate-change induced range extensions of Atlantic Coastal Plain Odonata Donald F. McAlpine, H. Scott Makepeace, Dwayne L. Sabine, Paul M. Brunelle, Jim Bell, and Gail Taylor Over the past two decades there has been a surge of interest in the Odonata (dragonflies and damselflies) of Maritime Canada and adjacent regions, with much new information accrued (Brunelle, 1997; Brunelle 1999; Brunelle 2010). Much of this increased interest in the region can be attributed to the efforts of a single investigator and his collaborators in the Atlantic Dragonfly Inventory Project (ADIP; see Appendix 2 in Brunelle 2010) and the Maine Damselfly and Dragonfly Survey. In spite of the extensive database of records for the Odonata of the region that now exists (35,000 records for the Maritimes, a further 30,000 for Maine), new discoveries continue to be made (Catling 2002; Sabine et al. 2004; Cook and Bridgehouse 2005; Klymko 2007; Catling et al. 2009), testament to continuing survey effort and the natural and anthropogenic changes in regional biodiversity always in process. Here we document expansion in the geographic range of two Atlantic Coastal Plain Odonata; Enallagma pictum Morse (Scarlet Bluet) (Odonata: Coenagrionidae), shown to be resident in New Brunswick and new for Canada, and Celithemis martha Williamson (Martha’s Pennant) (Odonata: Libellulidae), a species known previously from a single occurrence (Klymko 2007); and, comment on the significance of these records in the light of climate warming now in process.
    [Show full text]
  • Natural Areas Inventory of Bradford County, Pennsylvania 2005
    A NATURAL AREAS INVENTORY OF BRADFORD COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA 2005 Submitted to: Bradford County Office of Community Planning and Grants Bradford County Planning Commission North Towanda Annex No. 1 RR1 Box 179A Towanda, PA 18848 Prepared by: Pennsylvania Science Office The Nature Conservancy 208 Airport Drive Middletown, Pennsylvania 17057 This project was funded in part by a state grant from the DCNR Wild Resource Conservation Program. Additional support was provided by the Department of Community & Economic Development and the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service through State Wildlife Grants program grant T-2, administered through the Pennsylvania Game Commission and the Pennsylvania Fish and Boat Commission. ii Site Index by Township SOUTH CREEK # 1 # LITCHFIELD RIDGEBURY 4 WINDHAM # 3 # 7 8 # WELLS ATHENS # 6 WARREN # # 2 # 5 9 10 # # 15 13 11 # 17 SHESHEQUIN # COLUMBIA # # 16 ROME OR WELL SMITHFI ELD ULSTER # SPRINGFIELD 12 # PIKE 19 18 14 # 29 # # 20 WYSOX 30 WEST NORTH # # 21 27 STANDING BURLINGTON BURLINGTON TOWANDA # # 22 TROY STONE # 25 28 STEVENS # ARMENIA HERRICK # 24 # # TOWANDA 34 26 # 31 # GRANVI LLE 48 # # ASYLUM 33 FRANKLIN 35 # 32 55 # # 56 MONROE WYALUSING 23 57 53 TUSCARORA 61 59 58 # LEROY # 37 # # # # 43 36 71 66 # # # # # # # # # 44 67 54 49 # # 52 # # # # 60 62 CANTON OVERTON 39 69 # # # 42 TERRY # # # # 68 41 40 72 63 # ALBANY 47 # # # 45 # 50 46 WILMOT 70 65 # 64 # 51 Site Index by USGS Quadrangle # 1 # 4 GILLETT # 3 # LITCHFIELD 8 # MILLERTON 7 BENTLEY CREEK # 6 # FRIENDSVILLE # 2 SAYRE # WINDHAM 5 LITTLE MEADOWS 9
    [Show full text]
  • Ecography ECOG-02578 Pinkert, S., Brandl, R
    Ecography ECOG-02578 Pinkert, S., Brandl, R. and Zeuss, D. 2016. Colour lightness of dragonfly assemblages across North America and Europe. – Ecography doi: 10.1111/ecog.02578 Supplementary material Appendix 1 Figures A1–A12, Table A1 and A2 1 Figure A1. Scatterplots between female and male colour lightness of 44 North American (Needham et al. 2000) and 19 European (Askew 1988) dragonfly species. Note that colour lightness of females and males is highly correlated. 2 Figure A2. Correlation of the average colour lightness of European dragonfly species illustrated in both Askew (1988) and Dijkstra and Lewington (2006). Average colour lightness ranges from 0 (absolute black) to 255 (pure white). Note that the extracted colour values of dorsal dragonfly drawings from both sources are highly correlated. 3 Figure A3. Frequency distribution of the average colour lightness of 152 North American and 74 European dragonfly species. Average colour lightness ranges from 0 (absolute black) to 255 (pure white). Rugs at the abscissa indicate the value of each species. Note that colour values are from different sources (North America: Needham et al. 2000, Europe: Askew 1988), and hence absolute values are not directly comparable. 4 Figure A4. Scatterplots of single ordinary least-squares regressions between average colour lightness of 8,127 North American dragonfly assemblages and mean temperature of the warmest quarter. Red dots represent assemblages that were excluded from the analysis because they contained less than five species. Note that those assemblages that were excluded scatter more than those with more than five species (c.f. the coefficients of determination) due to the inherent effect of very low sampling sizes.
    [Show full text]
  • Rapid Assessment of Freshwater Wetland Condition; Development of a Rapid Assessment Method for Freshwater Wetlands in Rhode Island
    Rhode Island DEM Freshwater Wetland Monitoring and Assessment, Year 5 INTEGRATING RAPID ASSESSMENT WITH BIOLOGICAL AND LANDSCAPE INDICATORS OF FRESHWATER WETLAND CONDITION Draft Report Prepared for Rhode Island Department of Environmental Management Office of Water Resources May 2011 This page is intentionally blank ii Rhode Island DEM Freshwater Wetland Monitoring and Assessment, Year 5 INTEGRATING RAPID ASSESSMENT WITH BIOLOGICAL AND LANDSCAPE INDICATORS OF FRESHWATER WETLAND CONDITION Draft Report Prepared for Rhode Island Department of Environmental Management Office of Water Resources May 2011 Thomas E. Kutcher Rhode Island Natural History Survey 200 Ranger Hall, University of Rhode Island Kingston, RI 02881 [email protected] iii Acknowledgements This report was prepared in partial fulfillment of the contract agreement between the State of Rhode Island and Providence Plantations Department of Environmental Management (DEM) and the Rhode Island Natural History Survey (RINHS) named Technical Assistance to Support Monitoring and Assessment of Freshwater Wetlands. The agreement was funded in part by federal funds provided by a U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) Clean Water Act Section 104(b)3 Wetland Pilot Demonstration Grant. The project was managed and coordinated at DEM by Sue Kiernan and Carol Murphy. The project managers and author would like to thank those who contributed to this project. Matt Schweisberg, Peter Holmes, and Jeanne Voorhees (EPA Region 1) provided assistance in overseeing this Wetland Pilot Demonstration grant project, attended meetings, participated in field demonstrations, and provided meaningful comments on draft documents. Dr. Frank Golet (University of Rhode Island College of the Environment and Life Sciences—URI CELS) provided unlimited advice and valuable assistance in the development of RIRAM v.2.
    [Show full text]
  • 2015-2025 Pennsylvania Wildlife Action Plan
    2 0 1 5 – 2 0 2 5 Species Assessments Appendix 1.1A – Birds A Comprehensive Status Assessment of Pennsylvania’s Avifauna for Application to the State Wildlife Action Plan Update 2015 (Jason Hill, PhD) Assessment of eBird data for the importance of Pennsylvania as a bird migratory corridor (Andy Wilson, PhD) Appendix 1.1B – Mammals A Comprehensive Status Assessment of Pennsylvania’s Mammals, Utilizing NatureServe Ranking Methodology and Rank Calculator Version 3.1 for Application to the State Wildlife Action Plan Update 2015 (Charlie Eichelberger and Joe Wisgo) Appendix 1.1C – Reptiles and Amphibians A Revision of the State Conservation Ranks of Pennsylvania’s Herpetofauna Appendix 1.1D – Fishes A Revision of the State Conservation Ranks of Pennsylvania’s Fishes Appendix 1.1E – Invertebrates Invertebrate Assessment for the 2015 Pennsylvania Wildlife Action Plan Revision 2015-2025 Pennsylvania Wildlife Action Plan Appendix 1.1A - Birds A Comprehensive Status Assessment of Pennsylvania’s Avifauna for Application to the State Wildlife Action Plan Update 2015 Jason M. Hill, PhD. Table of Contents Assessment ............................................................................................................................................. 3 Data Sources ....................................................................................................................................... 3 Species Selection ................................................................................................................................
    [Show full text]
  • Ebony Boghaunter Williamsonia Fletcheri
    Natural Heritage Ebony Boghaunter & Endangered Species Williamsonia fletcheri Program State Status: Endangered www.mass.gov/nhesp Federal Status: None Massachusetts Division of Fisheries & Wildlife DESCRIPTION OF ADULT: The Ebony Boghaunter (Williamsonia fletcheri) is a small, delicately built, blackish dragonfly (order Odonata, sub-order Anisoptera). It is one of the smallest members of the emerald family (Corduliidae). Ebony Boghaunters are dull black in color, with bright green (male) or grey (female) eyes, a metallic brassy green frons (the prominent bulge on the front of the head), and a yellow- brown labium. The black abdomen has a pale yellow- white ring between the 2nd and 3rd abdominal segments (all Odonates have 10 abdominal segments), and a less conspicuous ring between the 3rd and 4th segments. Females are similar to the males, but have thicker abdomens, shorter terminal appendages at the tip of the abdomen, and are paler in coloration. Photo by Michael W. Nelson, NHESP Ebony Boghaunters range in length from 1.2 to 1.5 inches (32 to 34mm), with males averaging slightly The Petite Emerald (Dorocordulia lepida) has a flight larger. The wings are about 1.1 inches (22 mm) long and season overlapping that of Ebony Boghaunter and is hyaline (transparent and colorless), except for a very similar in its dark overall coloration, slight build, and small amber patch at the base. The nymph was metallic green frons with a yellow-brown labium. undescribed until recently (Charlton and Cannings, However, the Petite Emerald is slightly larger with a 1993). When fully developed, the nymphs average about metallic luster on its thorax, lacks abdominal rings, and 0.6 inch (15 to 17mm) in length, and can be identified has brilliant green eyes when mature.
    [Show full text]
  • Prioritizing Odonata for Conservation Action in the Northeastern USA
    APPLIED ODONATOLOGY Prioritizing Odonata for conservation action in the northeastern USA Erin L. White1,4, Pamela D. Hunt2,5, Matthew D. Schlesinger1,6, Jeffrey D. Corser1,7, and Phillip G. deMaynadier3,8 1New York Natural Heritage Program, State University of New York College of Environmental Science and Forestry, 625 Broadway 5th Floor, Albany, New York 12233-4757 USA 2Audubon Society of New Hampshire, 84 Silk Farm Road, Concord, New Hampshire 03301 USA 3Maine Department of Inland Fisheries and Wildlife, 650 State Street, Bangor, Maine 04401 USA Abstract: Odonata are valuable biological indicators of freshwater ecosystem integrity and climate change, and the northeastern USA (Virginia to Maine) is a hotspot of odonate diversity and a region of historical and grow- ing threats to freshwater ecosystems. This duality highlights the urgency of developing a comprehensive conser- vation assessment of the region’s 228 resident odonate species. We offer a prioritization framework modified from NatureServe’s method for assessing conservation status ranks by assigning a single regional vulnerability metric (R-rank) reflecting each species’ degree of relative extinction risk in the northeastern USA. We calculated the R-rank based on 3 rarity factors (range extent, area of occupancy, and habitat specificity), 1 threat factor (vulnerability of occupied habitats), and 1 trend factor (relative change in range size). We combine this R-rank with the degree of endemicity (% of the species’ USA and Canadian range that falls within the region) as a proxy for regional responsibility, thereby deriving a list of species of combined vulnerability and regional management responsibility. Overall, 18% of the region’s odonate fauna is imperiled (R1 and R2), and peatlands, low-gradient streams and seeps, high-gradient headwaters, and larger rivers that harbor a disproportionate number of these species should be considered as priority habitat types for conservation.
    [Show full text]
  • Inventory of Odonata (Dragonflies and Damselflies) at Gateway National Recreation Area
    National Park Service U.S. Department of the Interior Natural Resource Program Center Inventory of Odonata (Dragonflies and Damselflies) at Gateway National Recreation Area Natural Resource Technical Report NPS/NCBN/NRTR—2010/296 ON THE COVER Swamp Darner (Epiaeschna heros ) at Gateway National Recreation Area . Photograph by: Jackie Sones. Inventory of Odonata (Dragonflies and Damselflies) at Gateway National Recreation Area Natural Resource Technical Report NPS/NCBN/NRTR—2010/296 Nina Briggs, Eric G. Schneider, Jackie Sones, Kristen Puryear Rhode Island Natural History P.O. Box 1858 Kingston, Rhode Island 02881 March 2010 U.S. Department of the Interior National Park Service Natural Resource Program Center Fort Collins, Colorado The National Park Service, Natural Resource Program Center publishes a range of reports that address natural resource topics of interest and applicability to a broad audience in the National Park Service and others in natural resource management, including scientists, conservation and environmental constituencies, and the public. The Natural Resource Technical Report Series is used to disseminate results of scientific studies in the physical, biological, and social sciences for both the advancement of science and the achievement of the National Park Service mission. The series provides contributors with a forum for displaying comprehensive data that are often deleted from journals because of page limitations. All manuscripts in the series receive the appropriate level of peer review to ensure that the information is scientifically credible, technically accurate, appropriately written for the intended audience, and designed and published in a professional manner. This report received informal peer review by subject-matter experts who were not directly involved in the collection, analysis, or reporting of the data.
    [Show full text]
  • Agrion 24(2) - May 2020
    Covid-19 Special Issue Agrion 24(2) - May 2020 AGRION NEWSLETTER OF THE WORLDWIDE DRAGONFLY ASSOCIATION PATRON: Professor Edward O. Wilson FRS, FRSE Covid-19 Special Issue - Volume 24, Number 2 May 2020 Secretary and Treasurer: W. Peter Brown, Hill House, Flag Hill, Great Bentley, Colchester CO7 8RE. Email: wda.secretary@gmail. com. Editors: Keith D.P. Wilson. 18 Chatsworth Road, Brighton, BN1 5DB, UK. Email: [email protected]. Graham T. Reels. 31 St Anne’s Close, Badger Farm, Winchester, SO22 4LQ, Hants, UK. Email: [email protected]. ISSN 1476-2552 Covid-19 Special Issue Agrion 24(2) - May 2020 AGRION NEWSLETTER OF THE WORLDWIDE DRAGONFLY ASSOCIATION AGRION is the Worldwide Dragonfly Association’s (WDA’s) newsletter, normally published twice a year, in January and July. Occasionally a Special Issue is produced, as is the case for this issue, that has been published in response to the Covid-19 pandemic. The WDA aims to advance public education and awareness by the promotion of the study and conservation of dragonflies (Odonata) and their natural habitats in all parts of the world. AGRION covers all aspects of WDA’s activities; it communicates facts and knowledge related to the study and conservation of dragonflies and is a forum for news and information exchange for members. AGRION is freely available for downloading from the WDA website at [https://worlddragonfly.org/about/agrion/]. WDA is a Registered Charity (Not-for-Profit Organization), Charity No. 1066039/0. A ‘pdf’ of the WDA’s Constitution and byelaws can be found at its website link at [https://worlddragonfly.org/about/].
    [Show full text]
  • List of Rare, Threatened, and Endangered Animals of Maryland
    List of Rare, Threatened, and Endangered Animals of Maryland December 2016 Maryland Wildlife and Heritage Service Natural Heritage Program Larry Hogan, Governor Mark Belton, Secretary Wildlife & Heritage Service Natural Heritage Program Tawes State Office Building, E-1 580 Taylor Avenue Annapolis, MD 21401 410-260-8540 Fax 410-260-8596 dnr.maryland.gov Additional Telephone Contact Information: Toll free in Maryland: 877-620-8DNR ext. 8540 OR Individual unit/program toll-free number Out of state call: 410-260-8540 Text Telephone (TTY) users call via the Maryland Relay The facilities and services of the Maryland Department of Natural Resources are available to all without regard to race, color, religion, sex, sexual orientation, age, national origin or physical or mental disability. This document is available in alternative format upon request from a qualified individual with disability. Cover photo: A mating pair of the Appalachian Jewelwing (Calopteryx angustipennis), a rare damselfly in Maryland. (Photo credit, James McCann) ACKNOWLEDGMENTS The Maryland Department of Natural Resources would like to express sincere appreciation to the many scientists and naturalists who willingly share information and provide their expertise to further our mission of conserving Maryland’s natural heritage. Publication of this list is made possible by taxpayer donations to Maryland’s Chesapeake Bay and Endangered Species Fund. Suggested citation: Maryland Natural Heritage Program. 2016. List of Rare, Threatened, and Endangered Animals of Maryland. Maryland Department of Natural Resources, 580 Taylor Avenue, Annapolis, MD 21401. 03-1272016-633. INTRODUCTION The following list comprises 514 native Maryland animals that are among the least understood, the rarest, and the most in need of conservation efforts.
    [Show full text]
  • New Hampshire Dragonfly Survey Final Report
    The New Hampshire Dragonfly Survey: A Final Report Pamela D. Hunt, Ph.D. New Hampshire Audubon March 2012 Executive Summary The New Hampshire Dragonfly Survey (NHDS) was a five year effort (2007-2011) to document the distributions of all species of dragonflies and damselflies (insect order Odonata) in the state. The NHDS was a partnership among the New Hampshire Department of Fish and Game (Nongame and Endangered Wildlife Program), New Hampshire Audubon, and the University of New Hampshire Cooperative Extension. In addition to documenting distribution, the NHDS had a specific focus on collecting data on species of potential conservation concern and their habitats. Core funding was provided through State Wildlife Grants to the New Hampshire Fish and Game Department. The project relied extensively on the volunteer efforts of citizen scientists, who were trained at one of 12 workshops held during the first four years of the project. Of approximately 240 such trainees, 60 went on to contribute data to the project, with significant data submitted by another 35 observers with prior experience. Roughly 50 people, including both trained and experienced observers, collected smaller amounts of incidental data. Over the five years, volunteers contributed a minimum of 6400 hours and 27,000 miles. Separate funding facilitated targeted surveys along the Merrimack and Lamprey rivers and at eight of New Hampshire Audubon’s wildlife sanctuaries. A total of 18,248 vouchered records were submitted to the NHDS. These represent 157 of the 164 species ever reported for the state, and included records of four species not previously known to occur in New Hampshire.
    [Show full text]
  • Invertebrate SGCN Conservation Reports Vermont’S Wildlife Action Plan 2015
    Appendix A4 Invertebrate SGCN Conservation Reports Vermont’s Wildlife Action Plan 2015 Species ............................................................ page Ant Group ................................................................ 2 Bumble Bee Group ................................................... 6 Beetles-Carabid Group ............................................ 11 Beetles-Tiger Beetle Group ..................................... 23 Butterflies-Grassland Group .................................... 28 Butterflies-Hardwood Forest Group .......................... 32 Butterflies-Wetland Group ....................................... 36 Moths Group .......................................................... 40 Mayflies/Stoneflies/Caddisflies Group ....................... 47 Odonates-Bog/Fen/Swamp/Marshy Pond Group ....... 50 Odonates-Lakes/Ponds Group ................................. 56 Odonates-River/Stream Group ................................ 61 Crustaceans Group ................................................. 66 Freshwater Mussels Group ...................................... 70 Freshwater Snails Group ......................................... 82 Vermont Department of Fish and Wildlife Wildlife Action Plan - Revision 2015 Species Conservation Report Common Name: Ant Group Scientific Name: Ant Group Species Group: Invert Conservation Assessment Final Assessment: High Priority Global Rank: Global Trend: State Rank: State Trend: Unknown Extirpated in VT? No Regional SGCN? Assessment Narrative: This group consists of the following
    [Show full text]